AFGR vs GRW
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap Growth ETF vs TCW Durable Growth ETF
Which is better, AFGR or GRW?
AFGR has been ahead.
AFGR has a lower expense ratio. AFGR led over 1Y and the full window. AFGR is less concentrated, with 47.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 52.3%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AFGR | GRW |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.65%Best | 0.75% |
| AUM | $93M | $64M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.01% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 91 | 64 |
| YTD Return | +7.06%Best | +0.53% |
| 1Y Return | +5.34%Best | -2.86% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.98% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.15% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.6% | 16.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -26.6%Best | -31.5% |
| $10,000 over 2.4 years | $14,003Best | $9,712 |
| Top 10 Weight | 47.0%Best | 52.3% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | TCW ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 20, 2020 | May 5, 2024 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 7, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.4 years).
AFGR vs GRW growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.4 years both funds cover.
AFGR vs GRW Performance
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap Growth ETF (AFGR) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW) is an ETF from TCW ETFs. Over the past year AFGR returned +5.34% while GRW returned -2.86%. Year to date, AFGR is up 7.06% versus a gain of 0.53% for GRW.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AFGR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.6% compared with 16.4% for GRW. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -26.6% for AFGR and -31.5% for GRW. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.58. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFGR charges 0.65% per year while GRW charges 0.75%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $75 annually, a gap of $10 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFGR currently yields 0.01% against 0.00% for GRW.
Holdings Overlap
40.4% of AFGR's money is in holdings GRW also owns. 42.6% of GRW's money is in holdings AFGR also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
12 positions in common, counted across the 90 positions we hold weights for in AFGR and 30 in GRW, against full books of 91 and 64.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 16 positions for GRW that do not appear in our book for AFGR (47.9% of the fund), and 77 for AFGR that do not appear in GRW (59.0%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in AFGR | Weight in GRW | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 10.92% | 6.69% | 4.23% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 10.83% | 4.41% | 6.42% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.43% | 5.83% | 1.40% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.08% | 5.87% | 2.79% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.94% | 1.91% | 2.03% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 2.03% | 3.26% | 1.23% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 1.95% | 3.08% | 1.13% |
| DDOGDatadog Inc | 0.85% | 3.38% | 2.53% |
| HLTHilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. | 0.20% | 3.21% | 3.01% |
| CDNSCadence Design Systems Inc. | 0.92% | 1.91% | 0.99% |
42.6% of GRW is already inside AFGR.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AFGR or GRW?
AFGR has an expense ratio of 0.65% while GRW charges 0.75%. AFGR is the cheaper option, by $10 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AFGR or GRW?
Over the past year AFGR returned +5.34% vs -2.86% for GRW, so AFGR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), AFGR annualized +15.06% vs -1.21% for GRW. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AFGR or GRW?
AFGR has been the more volatile fund at 17.6% annualized versus 16.4% for GRW. Worst drawdown: AFGR -26.6% vs GRW -31.5%.
Should I hold both AFGR and GRW?
AFGR and GRW have a monthly-return correlation of 0.58, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between AFGR and GRW?
42.6% of GRW's money is in holdings AFGR also owns. 42.6% of GRW's is in holdings AFGR also owns. They hold 12 positions in common, counted across the 90 positions we hold weights for in AFGR and 30 in GRW.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFGR or GRW?
AFGR yields 0.01% while GRW yields 0.00%, so AFGR currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is GRW better than AFGR?
AFGR has a lower expense ratio. AFGR led over 1Y and the full window. AFGR is less concentrated, with 47.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 52.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.